XX31 Justice.
XX32 Legislature.
XX33 Lieutenant governor.
XX34 Lower Wisconsin state riverway board.
XX35 Medical College of Wisconsin.
XX36 Military affairs.
XX37 Natural resources.
XX38 Personnel commission.
XX39 Public defender board.
XX40 Public instruction.
XX41 Public lands, board of commissioners of.
XX42 Public service commission.
XX43 Regulation and licensing.
XX44 Revenue.
XX45 Secretary of state.
XX46 State fair park board.
XX47 Supreme Court.
XX48 Technical college system.
XX49 Technology for educational achievement in Wisconsin board.
XX50 Tobacco control board.
XX51 Tourism.
XX52 Transportation.
XX53 Treasurer.
XX54 University of Wisconsin Hospitals and Clinics Authority.
XX55 University of Wisconsin Hospitals and Clinics Board.
XX56 University of Wisconsin System.
XX57 Veterans affairs.
XX58 Workforce development.
XX59 Other.
For example, for general nonstatutory provisions relating to the historical
society, see Section 9125. For any agency that is not assigned a two-digit
identification number and that is attached to another agency, see the number of the
latter agency. For any other agency not assigned a two-digit identification number
or any provision that does not relate to the functions of a particular agency, see
number "59" (other) within each type of provision.
In order to facilitate amendment drafting and the enrolling process, separate
section numbers and headings appear for each type of provision and for each state
agency, even if there are no provisions included in that section number and heading.
Section numbers and headings for which there are no provisions will be deleted in
enrolling and will not appear in the published act.
Following is a list of the most commonly used acronyms appearing in the analysis.
DATCPDepartment of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection
DEGDepartment of Electronic Government
DERDepartment of Employment Relations
DETFDepartment of Employee Trust Funds
DFIDepartment of Financial Institutions
DHFSDepartment of Health and Family Services
DMADepartment of Military Affairs
DNRDepartment of Natural Resources
DOADepartment of Administration
DOCDepartment of Corrections
DOJDepartment of Justice
DORDepartment of Revenue
DOTDepartment of Transportation
DPIDepartment of Public Instruction
DRLDepartment of Regulation and Licensing
DVADepartment of Veterans Affairs
DWDDepartment of Workforce Development
JCFJoint Committee on Finance
OCIOffice of the Commissioner of Insurance
PSCPublic Service Commission
UWUniversity of Wisconsin
WHEDAWisconsin Housing and Economic Development Authority
WHEFAWisconsin Health and Educational Facilities Authority
_____________________________________________________________
agriculture
Current law authorizes DATCP to grant $240,000 in each fiscal year to Dane
County to assist in paying the costs of operating an exposition center and of hosting
the World Dairy Expo at the exposition center. This bill eliminates the authority and
the funding for those grants.
Commerce and economic development
Economic development
This bill requires the department of commerce to establish a grants
management office to identify public and private sources of grants, act as a
clearinghouse for those sources of grants, and offer to governmental agencies,
nonprofit organizations, school boards, charter schools, and private schools training
and assistance in pursuing grants.
Under the Business Development Initiative Program, the department of
commerce provides technical assistance and grants to individuals, small businesses,
and nonprofit organizations for developing and planning the start-up or expansion
of a business that is expected to provide job opportunities for persons with severe
disabilities. This bill eliminates the Business Development Initiative Program.
Commerce
Uniform Electronic Transactions Act
Currently, various state and federal laws govern the use of electronic
documents and signatures, the most significant one being the federal Electronic
Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act, or "E-sign." E-sign generally
preempts inconsistent state laws.
This bill enacts a version of the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (UETA),
which was approved and recommended for enactment by the National Conference
of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws in 1999. Although enactments of this
approved version of UETA are not preempted by E-sign, because this bill makes
certain substantive changes to the approved version of UETA that render the bill
inconsistent with the approved version, it is difficult to determine whether a court
would consider the bill preempted by E-sign. Because some of the unchanged UETA
provisions are ambiguous, this analysis does not cover all potential legal effects of
these ambiguous provisions.
Like E-sign, the bill primarily affects the use of electronic documents and
electronic signatures in transactions. Under the bill's broad definitions, such things
as information stored on a computer disk or a voice mail recording would likely
qualify for use as an electronic document. However, like E-sign, this bill does not
apply to the execution of wills, to testamentary trusts, or to a transaction governed
by any chapter of this state's version of the Uniform Commercial Code other than the
chapter dealing with sales of goods. Unlike current law under E-sign and the version
of UETA recommended for enactment in all of the states, the bill also specifically
exempts deeds and cancellation notices for local telecommunications services.
Like E-sign, this bill specifies that a document or signature may not be denied
legal effect or enforceability solely because it is in electronic form. Unlike E-sign,
this bill provides that an electronic document satisfies any law requiring a document
to be in writing and that an electronic signature satisfies any law requiring a
signature. The bill does not require the use of electronic documents or electronic
signatures. Rather, the bill applies only to transactions between parties each of
which has agreed to conduct transactions by electronic means. However, unlike
current law under E-sign, this bill does not contain any protections that specifically
apply only to consumer transactions. The consumer protections currently in effect
under E-sign would arguably have no effect in this state upon the enactment of this
bill.
Under this bill, a person may use an electronic document in a transaction to
satisfy any law requiring the person to provide, send, or deliver information in
writing to another person, if the electronic document satisfies certain conditions.
Although the bill also states that a document relating to a transaction may not be
denied legal effect solely because it is in electronic form, the bill likely permits a
person to deny the legal effect of an electronic document that does not satisfy these
conditions. The bill also appears to require the parties to a transaction to comply
with any legal requirement relating to the provision of information
other than a
requirement that the information be provided on paper.
The bill establishes the time and location of the sending and receipt of an
electronic document, although the parties to a transaction may agree to alter the
effect of these provisions. The bill also permits a sender to expressly provide in an
electronic document that the document is deemed to be sent from a different location.
The bill also establishes the legal effects of any change or error in an electronic
document that occurs in a transmission between the parties to a transaction. These
effects depend in part upon whether the parties have consented to the use of a
security procedure and whether the transaction is an automated transaction
involving an individual.
This bill generally permits the use of an electronic document to satisfy any law
that requires document retention. An electronic document retained in compliance
with these provisions has the same legal status as the original document and need
not contain any information the sole purpose of which is to enable the document to
be sent, communicated, or received. Under current law, this ancillary information
is normally required to be retained if the document to which it is attached is required
to be retained.
The bill does not apply to any new laws enacted by this state, after enactment
of this bill, that prohibit a person from using an electronic document to satisfy any
requirement that the person retain a document for evidentiary, audit, or like
purposes.
In addition, the bill does not preclude a governmental unit of this state from
imposing additional requirements for the retention of any document on another
governmental unit subject to its jurisdiction. It is unclear how this provision relates
to other provisions of the bill which provide that an electronic document satisfies any
retention requirement as long as specified requirements relating to accuracy and
accessibility are also satisfied. This provision is narrower than the corresponding
provision included in the version of UETA recommended for enactment in all the
states in that the corresponding provision is not specifically limited in its application
to documents of governmental units.
Like E-sign, this bill also permits electronic notarization, acknowledgement,
or verification of a signature or document relating to a transaction, as long as the
electronic signature of the person performing the notarization, acknowledgement, or
verification is accompanied by all other information required by law. Unlike current
law under E-sign and the version of UETA recommended for enactment in all the
states, an electronic notarization under this bill must also comply with rules
promulgated by DEG and the secretary of state. In addition, unlike the version of
UETA recommended for enactment in all the states, this bill provides that public
records retention requirement currently in effect in this state continue to apply. The
bill also permits the public records board to promulgate rules prescribing additional
records retention standards and DEG to promulgate rules with regard to the use of
electronic documents and signatures by governmental units.
Electronic mail prohibitions
This bill prohibits the user of an electronic mail service from sending an
electronic mail solicitation or chain letter that uses the service provider's equipment
in a manner that violates the provider's solicitation or chain letter policy. The bill
also prohibits any person from sending an electronic mail message or chain letter to
an Internet user that uses the equipment of the Internet user's electronic mail
service provider in a manner that violates the provider's solicitation or chain letter
policy.
These prohibitions apply only if the electronic mail service provider displays
the solicitation or chain letter policy on the home page of its Internet Web site and
makes printed copies of the policy available at no charge. The bill provides for
damages for an electronic mail service provider injured by a person who violates
either prohibition more than 30 days after the policy is displayed on the home page.
The bill also prohibits a person from sending an electronic mail solicitation
unless the person includes, with the solicitation, a return electronic mail address or
notice of a toll-free telephone number that the recipient may use to notify the person
that the recipient does not want to receive solicitations. If the recipient notifies the
person, the person may not send another solicitation to the recipient. In addition,
the bill prohibits a person from knowingly sending an electronic mail message that
represents that the message is from another person without the consent of that
person or that the message is from an Internet domain name without the consent of
the person that registered the name.
Internet privacy
This bill imposes certain requirements on a person that maintains Web sites to
conduct business in Wisconsin. First, the person may not disclose, in exchange for
anything of value, information about a state resident that is obtained from the
resident's use of the Internet, unless the resident consents to the disclosure. Second,
the person may not request a child to provide, through the Internet, personal
information about the child, unless the person makes a reasonable effort to obtain
the consent of the child's parent or legal guardian.
The bill also requires the person maintaining the Web site to display on the
home page of the Web site a description of any information that the person collects
about visitors to the Web site, including any information that is sold or provided to
third parties. If the person sells or provides information to third parties, the person
must allow a visitor to the Web site to notify the person whether or not the visitor
consents to the sale or provision of information. If the visitor does not consent, the
person may not sell or provide the information.
Correctional system
This bill reduces the funding and position authorization for DOC for the
purpose of delaying the opening of the New Lisbon Correctional Institution,
Highview Correctional Institution, the Oshkosh Correctional Institution
segregation unit, the Winnebago and Sturtevant workhouses, and the Racine
probation and parole holding facilities that were authorized in
2001 Wisconsin Act
16.
Under current law, DOC may establish a secure work program for inmates,
under which the inmates are assigned to work away from the grounds of their
institution but are restrained and required to wear distinctively colored clothing.
This bill eliminates DOC's authority to operate such a program.
Under current law, DOC may require, as a condition of probation, that a serious
child sex offender (a person who has been convicted of sexual assault of a child under
the age of 13) who is on or being placed on probation undergo antiandrogen treatment
(pharmacological treatment using a substance that inhibits the biological effects of
male hormones such as testosterone). DOC or the parole commission may also
impose such a requirement as a condition of parole, but may not base a decision to
parole the offender on the offender's suitability or willingness to undergo the
treatment.
A person confined in a state prison for an offense committed before December
31, 1999, is generally entitled to be released on his or her mandatory release date;
that is, once he or she has served two-thirds of his or her sentence. However, if a
person is sentenced to imprisonment for certain serious felonies, including sexual
assault of a child, the mandatory release date is merely a presumptive mandatory
release date. The parole commission may deny such a person presumptive
mandatory release if, among other things, the person is a child sex offender who
refuses to participate in recommended antiandrogen treatment.
This bill eliminates the antiandrogen treatment program.
Under current law, DOC must provide adequate health care to an inmate but
must generally require the inmate to pay a charge of at least $2.50 for each request
for health services. This bill requires DOC to promulgate emergency rules
increasing the charge to at least $7.50 for each request.
Under current law, DOC must charge a fee to each person on probation, parole,
or extended supervision to partially reimburse DOC for providing supervision and
services. If the person is subject to medium, maximum, or high risk supervision by
DOC, DOC must have a goal of receiving at least $1 per day, if appropriate, from the
person. This bill requires DOC to promulgate emergency rules requiring DOC to
have a goal of receiving at least $2 per day.
Courts and procedure
